Originally Posted by Godfrey
Nothing that more pixels wouldn't do, in my opinion. What else could the SL2 possibly do that the SL doesn't when the carefully made Leica lens profiles offered for M and R lenses allow them to image with just about the exact same beauty that they did on the cameras they were originally designed for?
Operationally, the SL2 couldn't do anything that the SL doesn't already unless they included a rangefinder cam linkage in the mount adapter that fed the focus distance display and maybe the automatic focus aids, but that would be a matter of the adapter rather than the lenses themselves.
I loved my SL, one of the very finest cameras I've ever owned. But I moved to the CL body a year and some ago as it suits what I do now, post-retirement, better than the SL body. Simpler, smaller, lighter, and the smaller format has some advantages for what I do with the camera. Regardless, I look forward to seeing what Leica provides with the SL2 body.
No doubt the CL is a great camera. I'm lucky because I own both a SL and CL. Call me spoiled.
The CL was a lot cheaper than buying short tele's for my SL. The CL takes great glass and exploits the sweet spot to get perfection. My 50 Lux-R "E60" becomes a 75 Lux and kinda crushes the 75 Lux-M version 2 I had wide open.
The Noct-Nikkor becomes an 87/1.2.
Interesting to note that the three button layout of the SL2 seems to have been "lifted" off the CL. The Leica menues are so easy to navigate and the CL keeps everything simple and direct. So intuitive...
A feature on my CL that I love is that if I have an autofocus L-mount lens on the CL and I switch to autofocus the camera enlarges the image to nail the focus the moment I turn the focus ring.
Too bad my CL did not do this with M-mount and R-mount. Only AF lenses work this way when set in manual mode.